WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
G/AG/GEN/100 
21 November 2011 
 (11-6054) 
Committee on Agriculture Original:   English 
  
 
FOLLOW-UP TO THE MARRAKESH MINI STERIAL DECISION ON MEASURES 
CONCERNING THE POSSIBLE NEGATIVE EF FECTS OF THE REFORM PROGRAMME 
ON LEAST-DEVELOPED AND NET FOOD-IMPORTING 
DEVELOPING COUNTRIES 
 
Submission by the World Food Programme (WFP) 
 
  The following submission, dated 17 November 2011,  is being circulated at the request of the 
World Food Programme (WFP). 
 
_______________ 
 
 
I. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN GLOBAL FOOD INSECURITY 
1. During 2010 and 2011, the impact of natural disast ers, escalating insecur ity associated with 
conflicts and escalating food and fuel prices created social and economic distress for hundreds of 
millions of people.  To meet these challenges, W FP utilized an expanding range of food-assistance 
tools to provide the right food to the right people at the right time in the right place. 
2. Despite growing awareness of hunger, global fo od aid flows in 2010 were the lowest since 
1990 at 5.7 million metric tonnes.  Nonetheless, th e world continues to rely on WFP as the primary 
mechanism for delivering food assistance to those in  need.  In 2010, WFP accounted for 66 per cent 
of global food aid and the vast majority of humanitarian food aid purchases globally. 
3. WFP reached 109.2 million beneficiaries in 75 co untries with humanitarian food aid and food 
assistance programmes, the second highest number in  WFP's history.  Woman and children were 
disproportionately affected by crises and accounted for 82 per cent of those assisted. 
4. Assessed beneficiary needs continued to outp ace the level of available funding.  The global 
economic environment made the resourcing situatio ns more challenging and increased pressure on 
foreign assistance budgets at a time of increasing needs.  Generous and flexible funding was 
fundamental in enabling WFP to meet requirements and ensure uninterrupted food deliveries in early 
2010. 
5. WFP's work in 2010 focused on four primary issues:  (i) responding rapidly to major natural 
disasters; (ii) maintaining post-disaster rehabilita tion in transition countries; (iii) establishing 
humanitarian space in challenging environments, for example by increasing security measures;  and 
(iv) responding to hunger with new tools and solutions. 
6. The growing proportion of cash contributions (rath er than in-kind food resources) enhanced 
WFP's capacity to purchase food efficiently.  In 2010, WFP purchased food worth US$1.25 billion, of 
which US$975 million came from developing countries, the second highest amount in WFP's 50 year 
history.  This food was purchased in 96 countries including 76 developing countries. G/AG/GEN/100 
Page 2  
 
  7. Through these food procurement operations, the WFP used its purchasing power to invest 
directly in the agricultural potential of developing c ountries.  In Liberia, for example, the purchase of 
rice from farmers for distribution to girls in th e school feeding programme as take-home rations 
resulted in increased rice production in three count ries;  the annual hunger period also decreased by 
two months, leading to improved food security in targeted areas. 
II. IMPACT OF RISING AND VOLATILE FOOD PRICES 
8. Rising food prices can be devastating to the 80 per cent of the world population that lives 
without food safety nets.  People living in these na tions are highly vulnerable and do not have the 
resiliency or cash to help them surv ive in highly volatile markets. 
9. For households that spend as much as 60-80 pe r cent of their incomes on food, these kinds of 
price hikes have a tangible impact.  When house holds cannot afford food they often accommodate by 
cutting the number of meals or by purchasing cheap er, less nutritious food.  Both of these coping 
mechanisms hit the nutritional health of the households. 
10. For households that are already living at subsiste nce level, food price rises of this order lead 
to increased levels of malnutrition, a decrease in  income available for schooling or access to health 
services, and potential instability in those countries that are worst affected. 
11. In several of the regions where WFP works, dom estic food prices have been soaring.  In the 
Horn of Africa region, the World Bank reported in August 2011 that prices had seen a dramatic rise.  
In Somalia, the prices of the two major commoditi es, red sorghum and white maize, have increased by 
30 to 240 per cent. 
12. Additionally, domestic food prices vary widely from country to country.  The annual price 
changes in maize in the 12 months up to June 2011 ranged from increases of more than 100 per cent 
in Kampala (Uganda) to reductions of 19 per cent in  Port-au-Prince (Haiti) and Mexico City.  This 
volatility is a challenge to WFP's food procurement both locally and globally. 
III. WFP RESPONSE TO RISING FOOD PRICES 
13. WFP has tried to limit the impact of rising food prices on its budget and the ability to provide 
food assistance to the targeted beneficiaries.  One of the most important tools WFP is using to 
mitigate the impact of high food prices includes sourcing more food locally.  As stated above, WFP 
procures most of its food in de veloping countries (2.6 million metric tonnes out of the total of 
3.2 million metric tonnes) and much of that on lo cal markets, the increase in global food prices has 
not yet had as large an impact as one might normally expect. 
14. In addition, WFP continues to enhance, th rough its Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping 
(VAM) unit, its monitoring of staple food commodity prices in more than 60 countries.  Its network of 
150 food security experts ensures that WFP is regul arly assessing and aware of the cost of food to 
vulnerable households. 
IV. FACILITATING THE MOVEMENT OF HUMANITARIAN FOOD ACROSS 
BORDERS 
15. As the world's largest humanitarian agency, W FP accounts for the vast majority of the food 
aid purchased in more than 76 countries.  Sudden price increases mean that WFP can buy less food to 
serve those that are hungry.  In the most extreme em ergencies, such as the Horn of Africa this year, 
the inability to resource food or move it across borders  due to security or to cross border restrictions, 
can mean the difference between life or death fo r thousands, particularly vulnerable women and 
children.  G/AG/GEN/100 
 Page 3 
 
 
  16. During the "food crisis" of 2007–2008, dozens of countries imposed various forms of trade 
restrictions on food staples, in order to maintain domestic availability of supplies and in some cases to 
contain growing public discontent about rising pr ices of food.  Some 26 net food-exporting countries 
maintained or introduced restrictions or other prohi bitions making it hard to acquire and ship food to 
the most needy, even when funds were available.  The potential for even more serious repercussions 
in the response to major humanitarian emerge ncy situations remains very real today. 
17. Despite the fact that a number of countries ha ve taken steps to decrease the impact of these 
restrictions that inhibit the movement of human itarian food across borders, measures continue to 
negatively affect WFP's procurement of humanitarian food.  As of September 2011, 21 countries have 
control measures in place that could potentially aff ect the timely and free flow of humanitarian aid.  
When necessary, WFP has had to appeal direct ly to the highest level of governments for a 
humanitarian exemption to restrictions that may seriously undermine its capacity to do the job – 
provide food supplies to hungry people. 
18. A few countries have exempted WFP's humanitarian food aid from restrictions 'on a case by 
case basis'.  For example, the Government of I ndia granted WFP an 'exception for humanitarian 
assistance', despite the extensive export restrictions  which were put in place.  India's willingness to 
sell rice to the organization allowed WFP to proc ure 100,000 metric tonnes of rice when WFP needed 
it most, for distribution to 22 countries across the world. 
19. Similar restrictions in the Black Sea region on wheat and wheat flour were of great concern to 
WFP this year given that in 2009, WFP bought the bulk of its wheat (95 per cent) from this region 
(Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan) which normally has competitive prices and relative proximity to 
some of WFP's biggest operations (e.g. Ethiopia a nd Sudan).  Close proximity lowers both shipping 
costs and delivery times.  In this case, an  ex ception on exports for humanitarian aid cargo allowed 
WFP to sign export contracts for wheat flour that were  urgently needed in the Horn of Africa, a region 
with high rates of severe hunger. 
20. Although exemptions on a 'case by case' basis have  sometimes been possible, this is not a 
sustainable solution.  In the time taken to find solu tions, lives are lost.  WFP is therefore very pleased 
with the growing commitment of governments to exem pt humanitarian food from such restrictions.  
Since 2009 World Food Summit in Rome, and most recently in the Cannes Summit Final 
Declaration1, governments have shown support for finding a sustainable solution for humanitarian 
food aid.  Removal of these restrictions, and a commitment to no longer impose them, will greatly 
assist WFP to facilitate the movement of humanitarian food across borders in a timely in efficient 
way, to save lives, and mitigate severe hunger.  WFP hopes that this issue can be also taken up by the 
WTO as suggested in the Cannes Final Declaration. 
 
__________ 
 
                                                      
1 Para. 47 of the Cannes Summit Final Declaration  states:  "... we agree to remove food export 
restrictions or extraordinary taxes for food purchases for non-commercial humanitari an purposes by the World 
Food Program and agree not to impose th em in the future.  In this rega rd, we encourage the adoption of a 
declaration by the WTO for the Mini sterial Conference in December 2011" .